Gyroscopic Investing

dualstow wrote: ↑Tue Dec 10, 2019 4:44 pm Not ‘The Onion’, tech:

https://twitter.com/peterboghossian/sta ... 45248?s=20

dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 6:42 am This *is* the Onion. Or rather, Babylon Bee. I’m on the lib/left side of climate change, but I love this:

Poll Finds Most People Would Rather Be Annihilated By Giant Tidal Wave Than Continue To Be Lectured By Climate Change Activists

https://babylonbee.com/news/poll-finds- ... -activists

dualstow wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:11 am Not the Onion, but as Steven Pinker says, it sure sounds like it.

https://twitter.com/sapinker/status/120 ... 25472?s=20

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:46 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aU4AbJrsZwU

Some family & USA Today got some kid fired for playing the circle game:



By saying he was flashing a white power hand sign. That the ADL decided was a hate symbol. Months after the picture was taken. The ADL's website actually uses the diagram from 4chan to explain how it means white power. Also the kid wasn't even doing the hand gesture.

I saw that headline and had to chuckle a bit. I figured Tim was going to get after it. Poor guy could probably sue for wrongful termination and defamation or whatever.

A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn't have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
link

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:52 pm

A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn't have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
link

municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 5:52 pm

A talented head cook at a school in central Sweden has been told to stop baking fresh bread and to cut back on her wide-ranging veggie buffets because it was unfair that students at other schools didn't have access to the unusually tasty offerings.

The municipality has ordered Eriksson to bring it down a notch since other schools do not receive the same calibre of food - and that is "unfair".
link

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:29 pm It’s from 2012.
I like the Churchill quote mentioned, Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:30 pm Harrison Bergeron

Anti-ableism activists assert that our society and institutions are structured in ways that privilege those without disabilities. They argue that our professional and public lives are easier to navigate if one is able-bodied and of sound mind. And that is undeniable: life is easier for able-bodied people. The anti-ableist reasoning says that the advantages of the able-bodied are unfair. Perhaps that is true: in some cosmic sense, it is unfair that one might be born with epilepsy or with a club foot. But it is here that the anti-ableist goes a step further. Many people would argue that life is harder for people with disabilities, and that is perhaps unfair, but they would also recognize that life is unfair and that there are limitations to the ways that society can ameliorate the difficulties faced by the disabled. In contrast, the anti-ableist argues that the parts of society that are still easier for the able-bodied person must be re-structured. They aren’t talking about installing ramps for wheelchairs to provide access to public buildings.

“Accessibility,” as defined by campus activists, is a consideration of the relative ease or difficulty of completing tasks and achieving goals. Thus, if one’s Attention Deficit Disorder ensures that a student misses critical information during lecture that will later appear on an exam, the professor must find alternate means of delivering that information. Otherwise, the course would be deemed “inaccessible,” which in the highly ideological prism of campus politics is tantamount to saying that the course is a form of oppression that accords “privilege” to the students without disabilities.
. . .
Accessibility, in the traditional sense, is a virtue to which a democratic, pluralistic society should aspire. But taken to an extreme—an explicit attempt to re-design institutional procedures and culture at large in such a way that a person with any limiting condition faces no additional challenge—accessibility represents an aggressive pursuit of a perfect equality of outcome. In this ideal world, not only can everyone succeed, everyone will succeed: any failure to meet a goal can conceivably be due to some unfair disadvantage (diagnosed or otherwise). The world imagined by anti-ableists is one in which everyone achieves excellence in all competitive pursuits. And of course, if everyone is excellent, then no one is.
. . .
Further, we were warned that if any assignments or course requirements could not be adapted to make them achievable and accessible for people with a(ny) disability, then the instructor should not have that requirement or give that assignment. As an example of how far-reaching these new guidelines would be if fully implemented, I am aware of an art instructor who tests students on their abilities to discern certain shades and tints of color. Obviously, this task can’t really be adapted for a person who is colorblind. Thus, such an assignment would now be evidence that the course is an inaccessible one—even if no one in the course is colorblind.
link

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:14 am

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:29 pm It’s from 2012.
I like the Churchill quote mentioned, Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 30, 2019 6:30 pm Harrison Bergeron

This report from the indoctrination facilities is on point with a new one: anti-ableism,

Anti-ableism activists assert that our society and institutions are structured in ways that privilege those without disabilities. They argue that our professional and public lives are easier to navigate if one is able-bodied and of sound mind. And that is undeniable: life is easier for able-bodied people. The anti-ableist reasoning says that the advantages of the able-bodied are unfair. Perhaps that is true: in some cosmic sense, it is unfair that one might be born with epilepsy or with a club foot. But it is here that the anti-ableist goes a step further. Many people would argue that life is harder for people with disabilities, and that is perhaps unfair, but they would also recognize that life is unfair and that there are limitations to the ways that society can ameliorate the difficulties faced by the disabled. In contrast, the anti-ableist argues that the parts of society that are still easier for the able-bodied person must be re-structured. They aren’t talking about installing ramps for wheelchairs to provide access to public buildings.

“Accessibility,” as defined by campus activists, is a consideration of the relative ease or difficulty of completing tasks and achieving goals. Thus, if one’s Attention Deficit Disorder ensures that a student misses critical information during lecture that will later appear on an exam, the professor must find alternate means of delivering that information. Otherwise, the course would be deemed “inaccessible,” which in the highly ideological prism of campus politics is tantamount to saying that the course is a form of oppression that accords “privilege” to the students without disabilities.
. . .
Accessibility, in the traditional sense, is a virtue to which a democratic, pluralistic society should aspire. But taken to an extreme—an explicit attempt to re-design institutional procedures and culture at large in such a way that a person with any limiting condition faces no additional challenge—accessibility represents an aggressive pursuit of a perfect equality of outcome. In this ideal world, not only can everyone succeed, everyone will succeed: any failure to meet a goal can conceivably be due to some unfair disadvantage (diagnosed or otherwise). The world imagined by anti-ableists is one in which everyone achieves excellence in all competitive pursuits. And of course, if everyone is excellent, then no one is.
. . .
Further, we were warned that if any assignments or course requirements could not be adapted to make them achievable and accessible for people with a(ny) disability, then the instructor should not have that requirement or give that assignment. As an example of how far-reaching these new guidelines would be if fully implemented, I am aware of an art instructor who tests students on their abilities to discern certain shades and tints of color. Obviously, this task can’t really be adapted for a person who is colorblind. Thus, such an assignment would now be evidence that the course is an inaccessible one—even if no one in the course is colorblind.
link

What's the difference between an independent Tupperware salesperson and a prolific freelance writer? OK, probably many things. But in California, we can add one more difference to the list: the former is legally allowed to exist, while the latter is not.

"There is no rhyme or reason to these nonsensical exemptions, and some are so ill-defined or entirely undefined that it is impossible to discern what they include or exclude. For example, some types of workers are excluded (e.g., a delivery truck driver delivering milk) while others performing substantively identical work are not excluded (e.g., a delivery truck driver delivering juice)."

sophie wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2020 7:56 pm In one of his books, Harry Browne talked about how he "fired" all his employees and made them all independent contractors. The reason is that it was a better deal for both the employees and for him: less overhead, less taxes, more opportunities for deductions etc. And that's without the 20% pass through bonus.

dualstow wrote: ↑Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:13 pm Ricky Gervais eating the Left:

https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1 ... 89632?s=20

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:03 pm Nice! Of course Biden's lap dogs (or Vinny's lap cats ) won't care.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/18/how-five- ... nnections/

“We Don’t Want to Scare People Off, So You Kinda Have to Feel it Out Before You Get into the Crazy Stuff…More, More Extreme Organizations and Stuff Like Antifa, You Know You Were Talking About Yellow Vests and All That; But, You Know We’re Kinda Keeping That, Keeping That on the Back-Burner for Right Now.”